c29 · 2019. 1. 23. · c29 (cont'd) 2. lease no. prc 7593 was originally granted to the city of...

A 19

s 8

MINU~J1~M This Calendar .J.tt;.qi No~was approved as

Minu.te Item N~ by th~ California State Lands (1qri~ion by a ~ote oft.!L_ to _{2. at its .1..L~l/1.2.""""'"''Zl..."'"' (.0"'"'""2 meeting.

CALENDAR ITEM

C29

AMENDMENT OF LEASE

11/07/97 PRC7593 WP7593.9

J. Lam

LESSEE: City of Foster City Estero Municipal Improvement District c/o Mr. Allan Shu 610 Foster City Boulevard Foster City, California 94404

AREA, LAND TYPE, AND LOCATION: Three parcels totaling 1.41 acres, more or less, of filled and unfilled sovereign lands, along Belmont Slough and San Francisco Bay, city of Foster City, San Mateo County.

AUTHORIZED USE: Levee improvements and recreational pathway system for the city of Foster City, Estero Municipal Improvement District.

LEASE TERM: 49 years, beginning October 1, 1991.

CONSIDERATION: The public use and benefit, with the State reserving the right at any time to set a monetary rent if the Commission finds such action to be in the State's best interest.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Amend the authorized improvements to include the placement of fill material for the widening of East Third Avenue. All other terms and conditions of the lease shall remain in effect without amendment.

OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION: 1. Applicant owns the uplands adjoining the lease premises.

-1-CALENDAR PAGE 106

MINUTE PAGE ~

CALENDAR ITEM NO. C29 (CONT'D)

2. Lease No. PRC 7593 was originally granted to the city of Foster City on September 23, 1991, to provide for levee improvements and a bicycle/pedestrian pathway system for flood protection and recreational purposes within two parcels of State sovereign land along Belmont Slough. On June 30, 1992, the Lease was amended to include an additional 1.11-acre parcel of State sovereign land along San Francisco Bay to the lease area. At the present time, the City requests another amendment to the Lease for the East Third Avenue Traffic Improvement Project. The City plans to widen the existing roadway which will involve the placement of fill material within the lease area. The road widening project will also allow spaces for vehicle parking along the roadway, and to provide pedestrian sidewalks.

3. An EIR was prepared and certified for this project by the city of Foster City. The California State Lands Commission staff has reviewed the EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted by the lead agency.

4. Findings made in conformance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, sections 15091 and 15096) are contained in Exhibit D, attached hereto.

5. A Statement of Overriding Considerations made in conformance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, section 15093) is contained in Exhibit D, attached hereto.

6. This activity involves lands identified as possessing significant environmental values pursuant to Public Resources Code sections 6370, et seq. Based upon the staffs consultation with the persons nominating such lands and through the CEQA review process, it is the staffs opinion that the project, as- proposed, is consistent with its use classification.

APPROVALS OBTAINED: California Department of Transportation.

FURTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, Regional Water Quality Control Board, United States Army Corps of Engineers and California St~te Lands Commission.

-2-CALENDAR PAGE 10 7

MINUTE PAGE

EXHIBITS: A. B. C. D.

CALENDAR ITEM NO. C29

CALENDAR ITEM NO. C29 (CONT'D)

OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LEASE WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT WITHOUT AMENDMENT.

-4-

CALENDAR PAGE 109

MINUTE PAGE 001111

EXHIBIT "A" PRC 7593

LAND DESCRIPTION

Portions of that Parcel 14881 and Parcel 14882 of land described in the deeds to the California State Lands Commission recorded March 27. 1972 in Volume 6116, page 528. and recorded February 7. 1973 in Volume 6320. page 528, Official Records of San Mateo County. said portion being more particularly described as follows:

COMMENCING at a brass cap monument set in concrete at the northeast comer of the subdivision shown on that subdivision map entitled Mariner's Island Unit No. 2. recorded in Volume 64 of Maps, at pages 31-35, San Mateo County Records; thence S 88°30'55" E 1133.78; thence along a tangent curve concave to the right, with a radius of 1282.70 feet, through a central angle of 06°25'10"; and arc distance of 143.71 feet; thence S 82°05'45" E, 1011.99 feet; thence N 07°54'15" E, 122.00 feet; thence S 82°05'45" E, 650.00 feet; N 07°54'15" E, 78.00 feet; thence along a curve concave to the left from a tangent that bears S 82°05'45" E, with a radius of 1382.61 feet, through a central angle of 5°46'56", and arc distance of 139.53 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, thence along the following courses:

1 .Continuing along last said curve, with a radius of 1382.61 feet, through a central angle of 21 °21 '34", and arc distance of 515.43 feet; thence 2 .N 37°22'25" W, 16.04 feet to a point on the agreed mean high tide line on the bayward slope of the levee; as said agreed mean high tide line is established, defined and described in Exhibits A and B of the "Boundary Agreement and Quitclaims" Agreement (1) recorded March 27, 1972, in \blume 6116, Page 528, Agreement (2) recorded February 7, 1973, in Volume 6320, Page 528; thence along mean high tide line, the following 36 courses:

1. N. 43°18'13" E., 26.25 feet, thence 2. N. 60°28'27" E., 100.00 feet, thence 3. N. 69°01 '02" E., 50.48 feet, thence 4. N. 64°42'34" E., 125.26 feet, thence 5. N. 56°01 '08" E., 125.48 feet, thence 6. N. 65°01 '37" E., 327.68 feet, thence 7. N. 68°38'34" E., 175.01 feet, thence 8. N. 71°48'08" E., 150.33 feet, thence 9. N. 67°04'17" E .• 250.03 feet, thence

10. N. 71°11'36" E., 125.20feet, thence 11. N. 64°56'06" E., 150.21 feet, thence 12. N. 61°08'44" E., 151.08 feet, thence 13. N. 63°10'54" E., 85.80 feet, thence 14. N. 68°22'52" E., 89.74 feet, thence 15. N. 40°51 '20" E., 165.28 feet, thence 16. N. 63°26'25" E., 61.14 feet, thence 17. N. 53°35'28" E., 49.71 feet, thence 18. N. 24°46'31" E., 28.64 feet, thence 19. N. 53°07'48" E., 25.00 feet, thence 20. N. 71°33'54" E., 26.88 feet, thence 21. N. 48°39'08" E., 49.95 feet, thence 22. N. 66°56'55" E., 25.54 feet, thence 23. N. 79°52'31" E., 42.66 feet, thence 24. East 50.50 feet, thence 25. S. 77°14'33" E., 27.17 feet, thence 26. N. 89°37'14" E., 75.50 feet, thencer.==============n

CALENDAR PAGE 110

MINUTE PAGE

27. S. 77°35'33" E., 25.60 feet, thence 28. S. 83°44'1 l" E., 41.25 feet, thence 29. N. 64°06'47" E., 75.58 feet, thence 30. N. 75°39'02" E., 22.19 feet, thence 31. N. 69°18'57" E., 52.38 feet, thence 32. N. 61°51 '30" E., 48.77 feet, thence 33. N. 46°28'08" E., 27.59 feet, thence 34. N. 56°53'19" E., 27.46 feet, thence 35. N. 65°33'22" E., 24.17 feet, thence 36. N. 71°00'00" E., 0.52 feet

to a point on the northwesterly right of way line of State Route 92; thence along said northwesterly line N 42°27'02" E., 20.92 feet to a point 10 feet bayward of said mean high tide line; thence along last said line the following 35 courses:

1. S. 71°00'00" W., 19.38 feet, thence 2. S. 65°33'22" W., 25.40 feet, thence 3. S. 56°53'19" W., 29.13 feet, thence 4. S. 46°28'08" W., 27.15 feet, thence 5. S. 61°51'30" W., 46.77 feet, thence 6. S. 69°18'57" W., 51.17 feet, thence 7. S. 75°39'02" W., 22.65 feet, thence 8. S. 64°06'47" W., 73.71 feet, thence 9. N. 83°44'11" W., 37.83 feet, thence

10. N 77°35'33" W., 26.18 feet, thence 11. S. 89°37'14" W., 75.47 feet, thence 12. N. 77°14'33" W., 27.14 feet, thence 13. West 52.50 feet, thence 14. S. 79°52'31" W., 44.68 feet, thence 15. S. 66°56'55" W., 28.28 feet, thence 16. S. 48°39'08" W., 49.53 feet, thence 17. S. 71°33'54" W., 26.48 feet, thence 18. S. 53°07'48" W., 29.15 feet, thence 19. S. 24°46'31~ W., 28.60 feet, thence -20. S. 53°35'28" W., 46.28 feet, thence 21. S. 63°26'25" W. , 62.28 feet, thence 22. S. 40°51'20" W., 164.83 feet, thence 23. S. 68°22'52" W., 87.74 feet, thence 24. S. 63°10'54" W., 86.43 feet, thence 25. S. 61°08'44" W., 150.93 feet, thence 26. S. 64°56'06" W., 149.33 feet, thence 27. S. 71°11'36" W., 125.01 feet, thence 28. S. 67°04'17" W., 249.98 feet, thence 29. S. 71°48'08" W., 150.19 feet, thence 30. S. 68°38'34" W., 175.60 feet, thence 31. S. 65°01'37" W., 328.78 feet, thence 32. S. 56°01'08" W., 125.51 feet, thence 33. S. 64°42'34" W., 124.12 feet, thence 34. S. 69°01 '02" W., 50.85 feet, thence 35. S. 60°28'27" W., 102.26 feet, thence

leaving last said line, the following 6 cou~es: 1. S. 71°33'55" W., 177.97 feet, thence 2. S. 81°47'01" W., 149.57 feet, thence 3. S. 85°31'11" W., 123.26feet, thenc~e============:::;i

CALENDAR PAGE 111 11------------...,.._,,, ( MINUTE PAGE

4. 5. 6.

N. 78°22'46" W., N. 47°02'39" W., S. 28°11 '21" E.,

47. 70 feet, thence 116.90 feet, thence 133.93 feet to the point of beginning.

EXCEPTING 1HEREFROM any portion lying landward of the abovementioned agreed line.

END OF DESCRIPTION

SCANNED AND REVISED APRIL 1992, BY LLB.

CALENDAR PAGE

MINUTE PAGE

EXHIBIT "B" PRC 7593

MINUTE PAGE

FILED EXHIBIT C ... JUL 111991

WARREN SLOCUM. County Cleik y · pATR!CI A FISCHBACH

DEPUTY CLERK

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

TO: ~ Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814

..XX. County Clerk County of San Mateo

FROM: City of Foster City 610 Foster City Blvd. Foster City, CA 94404

File: EA- 10-86

SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code

Project Title: ...EASJ_IHI!W AVEW!E EXTENSION AND EAST THIRD AVErWE/S.R. 92 INTERCii;::·~:

State Clearinghouse Number: ___.8,..9..,.0...,7...,0...,4_.1_9 ________ _ {If submitted to Clearinghouse)

Contact Person: Leslie Cannichael, Senior Planner Telephone No. : 415/349-1200

Project Location: 54.2 acres in northern Foster Citv on both sides of S.R. 92 whe~~ S. R. 9? a5cpnd5 from grmmd l eve] to become the San Mateo/Hav\·1ard Sri dae.

Project Description: Imorovement and extension of East Thi rd /1.ve. to Beach Park Sh:. construction of a fr~ewav interchange on S.R. 92. and extension of a water suoply ·r along East Third Avenue.

This is to advise that the City of Foster City has approved the above-described project on Jul v 1. 1991 and · has made the following determinations:

l. The project ..ll.... will / ____ will not have a significant eff~ct on the environment.

2. ~ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified for this project pursuant to the provisions of C!QA. ____ A Negative Declaration was prepared and approved for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.

3. _l!_ Mitigation measures ~ were I _____ were not made a condition of the approval of the project.

4. Findings ~were I ____ were not made pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines.

S. A Statement of Overriding Considerations ~ was / ____ was not adopted for this project.

The NEgative Declaration or Final EIR and record of project approval is available to the General Public at the Departmen~lanninq and Deve pment Services, City Hall, 610 Foster City Boulevard, ~~~ 404.

Date Maileda .Juli' 10, 1991 Signaturea

Date Received for Filing:

Name 1 Richard B. Ma s, i rector Title: Planning and De elopment Service

CALENDAR PAGE 114

MINUTE PAGE @09I07

EXHIBIT D

RESOLUTION NO. 91-101 Option 1

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE FOSTER CITY GENERAL PLAN TO MODIFY THE CONFIGURATION OF THE EAST THIRD AVENUE EXTENSION AND EAST THIRD AVENUE/STATE ROUTE 92 INTERCHANGE (INCLUDING A CONNECTION TO BEACH PARK BOULEVARD) AND MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15091-15093 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS-- CITY OF FOSTER CITY -- GP-91-002

CITY OF FOSTER CITY

WHEREAS, the City of Foster City desires to plan for future traffic improvements that will be needed to accommodate projected traffic volumes; and

WHEREAS, the City of Foster City, in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by the Secretary for Resources, and the City of Foster City Environmental Review Guidelines, has caused to be prepared an Environmental Impact Report which analyzes the impacts of the proposed project (SCH #89070419, EA-10-86); and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the Final EIR on June 20, 1991 and recommended certification by the City Council by adoption of Resolution P-34-91: and

WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified significant environmental impacts of the proposed East Thi rd Avenue Extension/East Thi rd Avenue/State Route 92 Interchange project; and

WHEREAS, in response to the impacts identified in the Final EIR, mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project, as described herein; and

WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was duly posted for consideration of the Final EIR and General Plan Amendment at the Planning Commission meeting of June 20, 1991, on said date the Public Hearing was opened, held and closed and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. P-35-91; and

WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was duly posted for consideration of the Final EIR and General Plan Amendment at the City Council meeting of July 1, 1991, and on said date the Public Hearing was opened, held and closed and on said date the City Council certified thP. Final EIR; and

WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of Foster City, as provided in CEQA, the State CECA Guidelines, and the City of Foster City Environmental Review Guidelines that the City shall not approve a project if it would result in significant environmental impacts if it is feasible to avoid or substantially lessen these impacts; and

Resolution 91-101 GP-91-002 Option 1

FINDING 1 - Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the Final EIR.

FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can, and should be adopted by such other agency.

FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Foster City has reviewed the Final EIR and considered the information contained therein and hereby finds that the project, as proposed, would have those significant environmental impacts summarized in the Final EIR. Those significant impacts which are adverse are listed in the following section of this Resolution.

The following section sets forth all adverse affects found to be significant for the East Third Avenue Extension and East Third Avenue/State Route 92 Interchange as identified in the Final EIR, and with respect to each effect makes one or more of the findings set forth above, and states mitigation measures included as facts in support of such findings. (Also noted below are adverse effects which were not found to be significant and any mitigation measures related to them that will be included in the project. The mitigation measures which are not related to significant impacts are marked with an asterisk, "*")

A. SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC IMPACTS

A.l. Impact: The Norfolk Street/East Third Avenue intersection would have Level of Service E in the PM peak hour.

Finding: The City Council hereby makes Findings 2 and 3, as noted above.

Mitigation: This intersection could be mitigated to LOS D via implementation of a separate left-turn lane from southbound Norfolk Street onto East Third Avenue. This mitigation measure has been recommended in conjunction with the San Mateo General Plan. At such time as the City of San Mateo decides to construct improvements to the East Third Avenue and Norfolk Street intersection, the City of Foster City will participate in discussions to address potent i a 1 cost sharing of improvements needed to address the impacts of the proposed extension and 1nterchange.

A.2. Impact: The Edgewater Boulevard/East Hillsdale Boulevard intersection would have LOS E in the PM peak hour.

Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding 1, as noted above.

2 CALENDAR PAGE 116

MINUTE PAGE @0&1Qe

Resolution 91·101 GP-91-002 Option 1

Mitigation: Implementation of a second left-turn lane from East Hillsdale Boulevard eastbound onto Edgewater Boulevard will improve PM peak operations from LOS E to LOS D. These improvements are part of planned improvements for this intersection. In addition to these improvements, separate southbound and westbound right turn lanes will be added by developers of adjacent properties.

A.3. Impact: If not properly controlled, the intersection of Teal Street and Beach Park Boulevard could pose a safety hazard if East Third Avenue is extended to Beach Park Boulevard.


Mitigation: a. A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of Teal Street and Beach Park Boulevard if East Third Avenue is extended to Beach Park Boulevard.

b. A traffic diverter will be placed at the intersection of Teal Street and Beach Park Boulevard which would prohibit through movements between East Third Avenue and Teal Street.

A.4. Impact: If East Third Avenue is extended to Beach Park Boulevard, it would be more difficult for cars to back out of driveways on Beach Park Boulevard.


Mitjgation: If East Third Avenue is extended to Beach Park Boulevard, the City of Foster City will restripe Beach Park Boulevard to the southeast of Teal Street from the present two lanes in each direction to one travel lane in each direction plus a median lane for traffic turning into and out of fronting properties.

B. NOISE

8.1 Imoact: Short-term construction period noise impacts would be noticeable to nearby residents and businesses, but would be capable of being mitigated.

Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding l, as noted above.

Mitigation: a. Where possible, construction noise will be mitigated by requiring that trucks going to the north side of the interchange project site use Foster City Boulevard and East Third Avenue as their haul route.

b. Where possible, access for trucks will be provided from the north side to the south side under S.R. 92 to eliminate the need for construction truck traffic on residential streets.

3 CALENDAR PAGE

MINUTE PAGE

117


c. Construction equipment will be monitored and inspected at periodic intervals to insure that the equipment is properly maintained and equipped with manufacturer's standard noise abatement devices, such as mufflers and engine covers.

d. If acceptable to Caltrans, access for construction trucks will be provided via the existing Caltrans access ramps from S.R. 92, eliminating the need for City streets to be used for access to the construction site.

C. AIR QUALITY

C.l Imoact: Construction air quality impacts would be due to dust generated by equipment and vehicles (not a significant impact).

Mitigation: to reduce dust.*

a. Exposed or disturbed earth surfaces shall be watered

b. Stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind shall be covered.*

c. The construction area and adjacent streets shall be swept of mud and dust as needed.*

0. LANO USE

0.1. Impact: The project would affect the Caltrans Maintenance Facility.


Mitiaation: The City will relocate the affected Caltrans facilities including the indoor storage area, parking lot and outdoor storage area to Caltrans property south of S.R. 92.

0.2. Impact: Property transfers would be necessary.


Mitigation: The City will negotiate with property owners for the acquisition of the properties necessary to construct the project. If necessary, the City may also exercise its power of eminent domain to obtain property required for the project.

0.3. Imoact: The project would affect the Werder Pier parking area.

Finding: The Cfty Council hereby makes Finding 1, as noted above.

4 CALENDAR PAGE 118

MINUTE PAGE QOaa&e

Resolution 9l-lOl GP-91-002 Option 1

Mitigation: The City will coordinate with the County of San Mateo (Parks and Recreation Department) to refine the details of how the proposed extension/interchange project and the renovation of the fishing pier and parking area would fit together physically and operationally.

0.4. Impact: The widening of East Third Avenue could disrupt pedestrian and bicycle traffic on the levee.


Mitigation: The final design of the extension and widening of East Third Avenue will insure that the levee pathway remains open and fully functional during the construction and operations period.

E. SOCIOECONOMICS

NO SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS

F. PUBLIC SERVICES


G. RISKS RELATED TO ACCIDENTS AND EMERGENCIES


H. NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME


Mitigation: The City will assist in the implementation of a 11 neighborhood watch'' program for Neighborhoods 2 and 3 and will coordinate a meeting between residents of the area and the Foster City Police Department's crime prevention staff.*

Mitigation: The Department of Public Works will seek. the input of representatives of the Police Department when the design of the project reaches the stage where landscaping and lighting are under consideration, as these characteristics of the site plan (both ~ and without a connection of East Third Avenue to Beach Park. Boulevard) affect lines of sight during routine patrols.*

I. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUE EFFECTS


5 CALENDAR PAGE 119

MINUTE PAGE ~

J. UTILITIES



Mitigation: The Department of Public Works will supply PG & E engineering staff with plans of the proposed project once more refined drawings are available and will collaborate with the utility to relocate the pad mounted switch if relocation proves necessary.*

K. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY

K.1. Imoact: Not enough data exists at present to eva 1 uate the seismic stability of the levee, specifically the permanent deformations produced by an earthquake.


Mitigation: A seismic deformation analysis could be performed as part of the final design of the project in order to better determine the stability of the levee in the vicinity of the site. The stability of the levee is a citywide issue which is being addressed by another consultant as part of the L:evee Improvements project (CIP 14-457).

K.2. Impact: a. Because the existing fill may not be uniformly compacted, the settlement caused by the compression of the fill may be uneven.

b. The consolidation settlement of the bay mud would be up to three inches for every foot of new fill placed on the site.

c. Because of low permeabi 1 ity of bay mud, the consolidation settlement would occur very slowly. It's estimated that 50 percent of the total settlement would occur within ten years and 90 percent would occur within 50 years.

d. Differential settlement would occur because of the difference in f11 l th1 ck.nesses and bay mud characteristics. The greatest differential settlement is expected to occur at the boundary between the old and new road. Therefore per1od1c asphalt overlays would probably be required to even out the differential settlement.

e. On the basis of the topography of the area, it has been assumed that the new fill thickness for the road embankment would not be more than about two feet thick.. In this case, the road embankment would be stable under normal condftions.


6 CALENDAR PAGE

MINUTE PAGE

120


Mi ti qat ion: a. The possibility of pavement damage caused by ground shaking and consequent lurching and differential ground settlement during a seismic event shall be investigated in the final design of the project.

b. In order to prevent uneven potential ground settlement due to unevenly compacted onsite fill, the existing fill will be excavated to about two feet above the groundwater level, backfilled and recompacted.

c. To reduce the settlement of the new road, its elevations will be kept as low as possible.

d. In order to accelerate the consolidation settlement of the bay mud, preloading with wick drains could be used.

e. Because the elevation of the roadway section located under the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge would be close to high tide elevation, and because rain water would tend to pond on this section, subsurface drainage will be provided with sumps and pumps to collect the water where it can be removed out of the area.

L. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY


M. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS


Mitigation: The excavation phase of this construction project shall include periodic inspections of subsurface excavations to ensure that potential unforeseen area of soil contamination are properly handled. During excavation, the contractor shall inspect subsurface soil for any obvious indications of contamination such as abnormal odors or soil staining. If contaminated soil is encountered, the construction supervisor shall notify the project management and representatives of the Foster City Fire Department.*

N. VISUAL/AESTHETIC IMPACTS

N. 1. Imoact: If a connection to Beach Park Boulevard is constructed, it is possible that vehicles traveling south on the connection would illuminate the corner lot homes on each side of the intersection, as the vehicles reach the intersection and turn either left or right.


Mitigation: a. If the connection to Beach Park. Boulevard is constructed, the proposed traffic diverter at the intersection shall be landscaped in such a way that it will block some of the light and glare of vehicles making left or right turns from the extension onto Beach Park Boulevar

CALENDAR PAGE 121 7

MINUTE PAGE


b. If necessary, the City of Foster City will design landscaping or fencing for placement around the corner edges of the two homes nearest the intersection.

0. PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE

0.1. Impact: The preferred alternative (inboard alignment) would cross approximately 1.6 acres of palustrine emergent wetland and would encroach upon a slight amount of the habitat where the endangered salt march harvest mouse was located.


Mitigation: a. The application for a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will include a wetland mitigation plan that has, as one of its purposes, the replacement of habitat acreage and value that would otherwise be lost as a result of the proposed project (replacement areas are shown on page 159 of the Final EIR).

b. During the construction period, potential impacts on the plant and animal life will be lessened through the designation and use of the least harmful staging areas and haul routes.

c. Sensitive areas will be mapped on the construction drawings and staked during construction.

P. WETLANDS ISSUES

P.l. Impact: The preferred alternative (inboard alignment) would cross approximately 1.6 acres of palustrine emergent wetland and would encroach upon a slight amount of the habitat where the endangered salt march harvest mouse was located.


Mitigation: The City has proposed a wetlands mitigation plan consisting of the fo 11 owing:

a. All wetland areas temporarily impacted during construction w111 be restored to their former condition at a 2:1 ratio of areas created to those temporarily impacted;

b. Permanently impacted wetlands will be replaced on-site at a 2:1 ratio of acres created to those lost on a per habitat basis;

c. Wetland creation sites w111 be located adjacent to existing wetland habitats of the same type and thus become an extension of the existing habitat type;

CALENDAR PAGE 122 8

MINUTE PAGE CiJ0

Resolution 91-101

GP-91-002 Option 1

d. The wetlands would be created by excavating fill material to an elevation similar to that of the adjacent existing wetland so as to develop a similar soil and hydrology regime;

e. Mitigation and restoration sites will be allowed to revegetate naturally, but if natural revegetation were not successful within two years, the areas will be sprigged with the desired plant species;

f. The mitigation and restoration sites will be monitored for success for a five-year period.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council makes the following findings related to project alternatives:

1. Pursuant to CEQA Section 2108l(c), the City Council finds that each of the alternatives to the Project described in the Final EIR is infeasible for the following reasons:

(a) "No Project" Alternative (continuation of existing conditions) - In the absence of the project, both traffic congestion and the consequent air pollution would continue to deteriorate at specific local intersections and along some roadway links in Foster City.

(b) "No Interchange" Alternative (East Third Avenye constructed to Lincoln Center Drivel - Anticipated growth in Foster City and San Mateo would result in unacceptable levels of service at seven key Foster City intersections.

(c) Interchange with Alternative Alignment of East Third Avenue Extension ("Outboard" Alignment - This alternative would impact a substantially larger wetland area including areas inhabited by the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.

(d) East Third Avenue Extension Without S.R. 92 Interchange - The presence of an extension without the traffic benefits of the freeway access would not alleviate more than a portion of future congestion or unacceptable service levels forecast to result from the No Interchange or No Project Alternatives. (Projected Levels of Service for this alternative are contained on page 43 of the Responses to Comments section of the Final EIR.)

(e) Construction of Water Syooly Line Without Extensjon of East Third Avenue or S.R. 92 Interchange - This alternative would not address any of the projected unacceptable traffic service levels forecast to result from the No Interchange or No Project Alternatives.

CALENDAR PAGE 123 9

MINUTE PAGE


(f) Interchange without a Connection to Beach Park Bouleyard - This alternative would result in unacceptable Levels of Service at the Foster City Boulevard/Metro Center Boulevard/Triton Drive intersection, specifically, LOS E in the AM peak hour and LOS F in the PM peak hour.

2. There is no other feasible alternative site for the project. The practical requirements for distances between interchanges are such that the proposed site is the only possible site for additional access to S.R. 92.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council has weighed the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the Final EIR and hereby determines that those benefits outweigh the risks and adverse en vi ronmenta l effects and therefore further determines that these adverse environmental effects are ''acceptable." A written statement of such overriding considerations, identifying the specific reasons why the City has determined that the economic, social or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, is contained below:

A. Unayoidable Significant Adyerse Imoacts. The following unavoidable significant adverse impacts are associated with the proposed project as identified in the Final EIR. These impacts cannot be fully mitigated by changes or alterations to the basic project.

1. The Norfolk. Street/East Third Avenue intersection would have Level of Service E in the PM peak hour. This intersection could be mitigated to LOS D via implementation of a separate left-turn lane from southbound Norfolk. Street onto East Third Avenue. This mitigation measure has been recommended in conjunction with the San Mateo General Plan. At such time as the City of San Mateo decides to construct improvements to the East Third Avenue and Norfolk. Street intersection, the City of Foster City will participate in discussions to address potential cost sharing of improvements needed to address the impacts of the proposed extension and interchange. It is not possible for the City of Foster City to mitigate this impact at the present time because the City of San Mateo does not have a timetable for construction of the left-turn lane at this intersection. If the interchange is constructed before the City of San Mateo is ready to have this improvement constructed and if the impacts of the East Third Avenue/S.R. 92 Interchange are as projected in the EIR, this could result in a significant adverse impact until the left-turn lane is constructed.

B. Substantial Public Benefits. The City Council has considered the public record of proceedings on the proposed project and does determine that adoption and implementation of the plan would result in the following substantial public benefits:

The· project would result in a redistribution of traffic awav from

10 CALENDAR PAGE 124

MINUTE PAGE OOaail ~ -<

Resolution ~l-101 GP-91-002 Option 1

intersections that would otherwise operate at unacceptable levels of service, resulting in an improved and more efficient circulation system for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Foster City does hereby approve the amendment to the Circulation of the Foster City General Plan as described in Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED as a ResolutJon of the City Council of the City of Foster City at the Regular Meeting held on the 1st day of

July , 1991, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmen Battaglia, Martinson, Oliver and Mayor Fitzgerald

NOES: Councilman Chinn

ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

~t:? RoaERiFZGERA;:o;AYOR

ATTEST:

THERESE TYREE, TY CLERK BY ANN VIGILEOS, DEPUTY CITY CLERK

11 CALENDAR PAGE

MI:NUTE PAGE

125

Untitled-1.tifUntitled-2.tifUntitled-3.tifUntitled-4.tifUntitled-5.tifUntitled-6.tifUntitled-7.tifUntitled-8.tifUntitled-9.tifUntitled-10.tifUntitled-11.tifUntitled-12.tifUntitled-13.tifUntitled-14.tifUntitled-15.tifUntitled-16.tifUntitled-17.tifUntitled-18.tifUntitled-19.tifUntitled-20.tif

c29 · 2019. 1. 23. · c29 (cont'd) 2. lease no. prc 7593 was originally granted to the city of...

Documents